Abstract TP408: Risk Factors for Clinical and Radiographic Progression in Pediatric Moyamoya
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To compare clinical and radiographic evolution of moyamoya disease (MMD) and moyamoya syndrome (MMS). Method: We conducted a retrospective review of a prospectively enrolled cohort of children with moyamoya followed from 2003 to 2018. Patients with a final diagnosis of PHACE syndrome and transient cerebral arteriopathy were excluded. Demographic, clinical and radiographic (MRI) characteristics at diagnosis were obtained. Evidence of clinical evolution (stroke, TIA) or radiographic progression were assessed on subsequent clinical visits and neuroimaging, respectively. We compared the frequency and time to clinical and radiographic progression prior to revascularization surgery between MMD and MMS (including specific etiologies, namely neurofibromatosis [NF1] and sickle cell disease [SCD]). Comparisons were conducted using independent t or chi-square tests, as appropriate. Results: Ninety-three patients were identified, of whom 37 had MMD and 56 had MMS (20 NF1, 20 SCD and 16 others etiologies). The median age at presentation was 8.31 years (IQR 5.03-10.87) and the median follow up time was 5 years ( IQR 2-8). MMD were at greater risk of a recurrent ischemic event (52% MMD vs 42% MMS, p=0.049), but no difference was noted between MMD, NF1 and SCD. The risk of ischemic event recurrence was significantly higher among patients who presented with TIA at diagnosis (79.26% vs 21%, p <0.0001), an advanced Suzuki stage (59% with Suzuki 3-6 vs 28% Suzuki with 1-3, p= 0.009) and bilateral moyamoya (47% vs 21.95% with unilateral, p=0.012). No difference was noted between groups regarding the median time to radiographic progression. Radiographic progression was more likely among younger children (50% if less 10 years vs 21% if more than 10 years, p= 0.0085) and children presenting with TIA (53% vs 34%, p=0.038). Conclusions: TIA at presentation, advance Suzuki stage, and bilateral disease conferred greater ischemic risk among children with moyamoya. Vasculopathy progression was more likely among young patients and those with TIA at presentation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".